MLB Calls Chicago About Infield Fly Interference

[Lindsay]

Major League Baseball purportedly called Chicago and said umpire Junior Valentine's infield fly interference double play call to end Thursday's Orioles-White Sox game wasn't necessary and shouldn't have happened. The following is a deep dive into the history of this rule and how the league's hasty response to a 2012 play at Dodger Stadium led to a situation that enabled this game-ending call to occur.

As stated in our White Sox Lose After Infield Fly Interference Double Play (5/23/24) article, Valentine's ruling that White Sox baserunner R2 Andrew Vaughn interfered with Orioles shortstop Gunnar Henderson as he attempted to field a batted ball off the bat of Andrew Benintendi during an infield fly situation was proper pursuant to the Official Baseball Rules.

OBR 6.01(a)(10) ("Any runner is out when—they fail to avoid a fielder who is attempting to field a batted ball, or intentionally interfere with a thrown ball") puts Vaughn out for interference—no matter how slight the interference is—and kills play immediately upon such interference. For Valentine, there was no "wait and see if the ball is caught" moment, as the rulebook requires that play be declared dead immediately upon the interference.

The book's Infield Fly Rule definition then mandated that both the runner who interfered and the batter be declared out for interference and the infield fly rule, respectively, resulting in a double play. With one out in the 9th, this double play resulted in the third out of the inning, which also happened to be the final out of the game.

When MLB's Senior VP of On-Field Operations Michael Hill purportedly contacted Chicago to decry the way this game ended, it was an alleged expression of a widespread opinion: that this double play to end the game interference-and-infield-fly call simply "looked" off-putting and ended the game on a sour note.

Yet according to the rules, this is the correct call. In 2012, 1B Umpire Todd Tichenor called Dodgers batter Andre Ethier out for interfering with Marlins first baseman Derek Lee during Los Angeles batter Luis Cruz's infield fly (runners on first and second, less than two out). The rulebook at the time didn't provide for what to do with interference during an infield fly, and after a very lengthy conference, umpires ruled Ethier out and returned Cruz to bat.

Related Post: Case Plays: Infield Interference, Foul Fly or Complete Chaos (8/28/12).

During the subsequent offseason, MLB's Rules Committee decided this was not a fair outcome and crafted a new infield fly rule amendment, writing that interference during a fair infield fly is a dead ball double play (only the runner is out on a foul ball).

Season after season, this rule of response sat dormant at the major league level...until a similar situation occurred in Chicago, this one much higher-profile with much more devastating consequences.

So while MLB might not like the outcome, under the rule change the league itself made in 2013, this is the correct call. The only question is how to fix it for next time, if we don't want this to be the case.

Here are six rule change proposals, ranging from removing the fielder's "right of way" protection on an infield fly since the batter is out anyway, treating interference during an infield fly like obstruction type 2 (effectively, a delayed dead ball), only penalizing intentional interference with a double play, and more. What do you think should happen?

Video as follows:
Alternate Link: MLB allegedly tells Chicago it didn't like infield fly INT double play...but it's their rule

View the full article

[dumbdumb]

as we all know, baseball is reactive not pro active, on the rules. all rules should be thought of in the vein of what happens if this is the last play of the game, ends the game in this fashion. if you take that viewpoint with all rules and be consistently reviewing them with the rules committee (what/what if plays for other rules could ruin the game (if you think this one was ruined) and remember, don't cheat this train of thought by saying, oh it was in the first week rather than the last week of the season or early in the game rather than late---all games every pitch, every puff of wind is the 7th game of the world series for all the stats that are kept, and everything decides careers from pitch one on opening day. no putting importance on certain plays or pitches, when they occur, how they occur, etc. everything is do or die from first pitch on. and make all the rules reflect that.

and, if you want to say, you need to see how bad the contact is (and use common sense, that does not count because common sense is different for everyone), just kick all the plays to replay and let them say whether the contact had any bearing on the play in their judgement and let them confirm, overturn, or stand. or heck, just ask the player.

hey, did you drop the ball on that 1,000 foot in the air fly ball that you had to move 10 feet for and had a little contact with the runner at the 2 ft mark, or did it not. what if the player says yes, that distracted me enough that i had to reposition my eyes to find the ball again and was very distracted by that. did he push me down, no, but that little bump really distracted me and caused me to miss the ball. had that not happened i feel, oops, i know 150% i would have caught the ball.

and, can all the rules be perfect and each word have a 5,000 perfect examples of case plays with it so as to never have any disagreements. yeh right.

how bout that almost fight in the SEC where mister Tennessee in the Mississippi State game did not like a check swing that was involved.

i thought that past the front hip guidance was the holy grail of check swings to end all arguments. apparently not. just have that line on a graph thing we have seen at CCS and if the bat gets to the line, ie touches it, we have a strike, and send them all to replay every time for them to give an answer.

and where are those published plate stats for the SECs tournament umpires. i would think they show pretty much the same thing as MLB. some are better than others. All the way from 95/96 for a high to 90/91 for a low over the season, but where are they to view. don't keep them hidden

so where is that perfect world. is it out there with the stars. where's jim kirk when you need him.

[johnnyg08]

5 hours ago, dumbdumb said:

as we all know, baseball is reactive not pro active, on the rules. all rules should be thought of in the vein of what happens if this is the last play of the game, ends the game in this fashion. if you take that viewpoint with all rules and be consistently reviewing them with the rules committee (what/what if plays for other rules could ruin the game (if you think this one was ruined) and remember, don't cheat this train of thought by saying, oh it was in the first week rather than the last week of the season or early in the game rather than late---all games every pitch, every puff of wind is the 7th game of the world series for all the stats that are kept, and everything decides careers from pitch one on opening day. no putting importance on certain plays or pitches, when they occur, how they occur, etc. everything is do or die from first pitch on. and make all the rules reflect that.

and, if you want to say, you need to see how bad the contact is (and use common sense, that does not count because common sense is different for everyone), just kick all the plays to replay and let them say whether the contact had any bearing on the play in their judgement and let them confirm, overturn, or stand. or heck, just ask the player.

hey, did you drop the ball on that 1,000 foot in the air fly ball that you had to move 10 feet for and had a little contact with the runner at the 2 ft mark, or did it not. what if the player says yes, that distracted me enough that i had to reposition my eyes to find the ball again and was very distracted by that. did he push me down, no, but that little bump really distracted me and caused me to miss the ball. had that not happened i feel, oops, i know 150% i would have caught the ball.

and, can all the rules be perfect and each word have a 5,000 perfect examples of case plays with it so as to never have any disagreements. yeh right.

how bout that almost fight in the SEC where mister Tennessee in the Mississippi State game did not like a check swing that was involved.

i thought that past the front hip guidance was the holy grail of check swings to end all arguments. apparently not. just have that line on a graph thing we have seen at CCS and if the bat gets to the line, ie touches it, we have a strike, and send them all to replay every time for them to give an answer.

and where are those published plate stats for the SECs tournament umpires. i would think they show pretty much the same thing as MLB. some are better than others. All the way from 95/96 for a high to 90/91 for a low over the season, but where are they to view. don't keep them hidden

so where is that perfect world. is it out there with the stars. where's jim kirk when you need him.

Yep. This right here. 

[beerguy55]

 

I frankly think simply declaring an IFF dead is the easiest...How often do you see IFF called...and how many of those does an uncaught IFF result in runners advancing (or being put out trying to) - sure, it happens once in a while...and the higher the level of ball the longer that while.

At the MLB level an IFF is inconsequential 99.9% of the time (conservatively) - just call it dead and don't worry about those exceptions.